When you’re hit by another driver, especially through no fault of your own, you expect your insurance to step in and help. But what happens when you’re told the policy you thought would protect you… doesn’t exist?
Attorney Robert Howell successfully recovered $265,000 for a client who was initially told there was no Underinsured Motorist (UIM) coverage available to help cover the costs of his injuries and that his only recourse was through the at-fault driver’s liability policy. Through skilled legal strategy and a deep understanding of South Carolina’s insurance laws, Attorney Howell proved otherwise, turning a denied claim that would have left the victim on the hook for medical bills into a $265,000 recovery.
Rear-Ended on Coleman Boulevard
Our client was stopped in traffic on Mount Pleasant’s Coleman Boulevard when another driver slammed into the back of his car. The at-fault driver carried only the state minimum of $25,000 in liability coverage, not nearly enough to cover the medical expenses and property damage that were to come.
At the time of the wreck, our client believed he had Underinsured Motorist (UIM) coverage, a form of insurance that kicks in when the at-fault driver’s insurance isn’t enough. With just under $50,000 in medical bills and mounting expenses, he knew the measly $25,000 liability policy from the at-fault driver was not nearly enough to cover his bills. Attorney Howell knew that his client rejected Underinsured Motorist coverage, but he also knew that the rejection was not valid- since it was signed over 12 years ago. Attorney Howell was aggressive, and it led to an extremely favorable outcome.
Challenging Faulty UIM Rejection Uncovers Policy Issues
After reviewing the details of the client’s auto insurance policy, Attorney Howell suspected that Farmers may not have complied with South Carolina law regarding meaningful offers of UIM coverage. Howell focused on a key ruling from State Supreme Court case, Webb v. South Carolina Ins. Co., which states that if an essential term of the insurance contract is renegotiated (such as the premium), the insurer must make a new and meaningful offer of UIM coverage.
“The rejection form from 2012 was legally flawed,” Howell explained. “It didn’t include the cost of coverage or explain what rights the client was giving up. That’s a violation of the Wannamaker decision, and once you show that, the whole conversation changes.”
In this case, Attorney Howell pointed out several important changes to the client’s policy over the years:
- His premium had increased nearly every time the policy was renewed.
- Additional insurers, our client’s children, were added between 2013 and 2016, which constituted a material change and should have triggered a new offer of UIM.
- The rejection form from 2012 lacked crucial disclosures, including the cost of the coverage and an adequate explanation of what was being rejected. A violation of the Wannamaker decision, which defines the requirements for a legally valid rejection.
Based on these facts, Attorney Howell argued that the insurer had a legal obligation to reform the policy to include UIM coverage retroactively. Eventually, Farmers agreed. The policy was corrected to reflect UIM coverage that the client should have had all along
Unlocking Coverage to Protect Future Medical Costs
With coverage in place, the next step was to prove what the claim was truly worth. As part of the negotiation process, Attorney Howell obtained a future care estimate from our client’s physicians, outlining the expected costs of surgery and ongoing injections. These projected medical expenses were key in establishing the true value of the claim.
By successfully arguing for reformation of the policy, Howell unlocked an additional $240,000 in UIM coverage, bringing the total settlement to $265,000. By securing these funds, Howell ensured that his client, who will likely require surgery in the future, was relieved of the financial stress of paying out-of-pocket for injuries he didn’t cause. Now, he can pursue the care he needs on his own timeline, without financial pressure.
Don’t Overlook the Value of Underinsured Motorist Coverage
This case is a clear reminder of the importance of fully understanding your insurance coverage and how the law protects policyholders when insurers fail to follow proper procedures. It also highlights the importance of hiring an attorney who understands how to uncover these opportunities.
“When you’re dealing with an insurer that doesn’t do much business in South Carolina, it’s even more important to request the UIM rejection form and evaluate it under the law,” Howell explained. “We advise all of our clients to carry Underinsured Motorist coverage because the reality is, far too many drivers only carry the bare minimum. Without UIM, you could be left footing the bill for someone else’s mistake, and that’s a risk no one should have to take.”
This case powerfully illustrates how complex insurance policies can become and how critical it is to have an experienced legal advocate on your side when the unexpected happens. Thanks to Attorney Robert Howell’s knowledge of South Carolina’s insurance laws, our client went from facing a devastating financial shortfall to receiving a settlement that will support his recovery. If you’ve been injured in an accident and you’re being told “there’s nothing more available,” don’t take no for an answer. Let us help you challenge it. We’ll review your case, insurance policies, and options available to help ensure that you aren’t left paying for someone else’s mistake. You deserve answers, and a team determined to get them. Just Call Joye at (888) 324-3100 or fill out a contact form to get started.
Client Satisfaction
The client later left a review, stating:
“My Attorney, Robert Howell, was amazing. He went above and beyond to make sure I had the best outcome. Joye Law Firm staff are very attentive and have your best interests at heart.”
Thanks to Attorney Howell’s strategic use of South Carolina case law, the client received a life-changing settlement and peace of mind without having to step into a courtroom.
Disclaimer: Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.
